Texture

Archives:
2004_February
2004_March
2004_April
2004_May
2004_June
2004_July
2004_August

Note:
It is my policy not to delete or remove dialog from this page. Everything will be saved and archived. However, if you are anonymous and post on this page anything I consider vandalism or foolishness it may be deleted.

Help!

How would I go about reducing the table that has the wikistress picture (in my main user page) so that the width gets smaller, and the "what is Ilyanep watching" and "what is Ilyanep Reading" snap together, and the wikistress table fits snugly in with those two and the quotes table? No matter what I do the table seems to stay the same length! — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 18:31, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Never mind, I made it work by increasing the width of the big table by 10px. Thanks for any help you would've given me (lol). — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 19:14, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Except, it doesn't work. It works in the preview but not in the real thing! What is wrong? ARGH! — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 19:35, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Reply is at User talk:Ilyanep#Thermometer — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 21:18, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Could you please do the honors and do it for me? I think I simply messed it up! Thanks — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 21:38, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Reply is at My Talk page. Thank you very much for your help. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 21:52, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

trombone page

FYI: I have blocked the anon IP creating all those self-link "pages" about jazz guys - I see you're reverting his google-pushing! I put only a 24-hour block, so we may need to watch out tomorrow. - DavidWBrooks 20:32, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out for it. - Tεx τ urε 20:34, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nonsense

Peace (I am no longer anonymous... so perhaps now we can talk better) --Ramos 21:14, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If you continue the same nonsense it will be deleted. - Tεx τ urε 21:16, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ok how about the compromise.

The links to the propaganda site are removed and the links for the official news report are added (The Associated Press and ABC NEWS links)

--Ramos 23:11, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This is the compromise I proposed. You continued to attack me when I spoke of it. It is the current state of the article. I left the ABC link with no additional comment from your original. - Tεx τ urε 23:29, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Texture I have already apologized for that. I took your constant deletion of my links as vandalizing. Remember you though you were supporting other user when in fact the other user was you. So even you were mistaken even thou you have not acknowledge it yet. Also I haveI kept my word not to do anything else until we come to an agreement.

Now about the compromise; you have not yet removed the israel.us.org link and replace it the Associated Press Link like we talked about.... Since I don't have the link of the Associated Press the only thing I can do is delete the link from the isreal-us.org. So I though you should be the one who made the change since you can delete propaganda link and add the News link that you know....

--Ramos 13:42, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If you consider any other users' edits to be vandalism you will be very busy. Please don't start that nonsense again. I was not seeking an apololgy merely referencing my ignored compromise (at that time).

I have addressed my concerns through my edits that you now approve of. If you don't have a substitute for the israel-us.org link I suggest that you add a comment to Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks requesting a more mainstream replacement link. If you, or I, deletes the link without a replacement I expect it will be reverted. - Tεx τ urε 14:00, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ok, so if you no longer are supporting the other user, which was your original claim. And you have no issue with the link from the israel-us.org site been there without a disclaimer that they are a pro-Israeli site with an agenda then do you still have an issue with the http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html site been there. No one else is deleting the link but you, so perhaps you can tell me why you believe one link should stay over the other link? You can even add the title "a none-mainstream explanation of who they where". Is that a compromise?

Wrong. I was never "supporting the other user". I was agreeing with the other user as I am now agreeing with you that a mainstream version instead of the biased israeli-us.org is needed. (Was not aware of that one until you pointed it out.) I support no biased sites unless the intent is to point out the bias or no other source for the information exists. (Even then it has to have a good reason.) If you want that link gone find a replacement or request help on the talk page. Why are you so afraid of the talk page? - Tεx τ urε 15:34, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What I am afraid of? What are you afraid of just leaving the link and letting the people makeup their mind? And again there never was "the other user" you were "agreeing with", both time in July and in August it was you the same person who deleted the link (on less you allow other people to use your account). You don't have to trust me, just check the history. So don't tell me that you were just "agreeing with the other user" when you deleted the link.

Check for yourself http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=September_11%2C_2001_attacks&diff=4658814&oldid=4613281

Henry VIII

Henry VIII has not been deemed a religious figure by any respected or reasonable historical study. He was a monarch who, for the sake of his proclivity for numerous betrothals, defied the Pope. He did not contribute to religious doctrine, or aid in reformation of a particular system such as Protestantism, and his separation from Catholicism resulted in the looting of monastaries and churches about his kingdom. The political ramifications of a conversion made for convenience do not point to his being a religious figure, in spite of his supposed charisma and effect on religion. In this case any political figure who has a hand in politics that relate to religion is a 'religious figure.' I've included this discussion in the Talk Page of the Religion article and invite you to discuss this over there (just so we have other people's input). --LordSuryaofShropshire 14:59, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

How can the founder of a breakaway church, that still exists today, be excluded as a religious figure of historical note? I don't argue that he is not respected in that role. Merely that his story and that of his very large church is important. I will add this to the Talk:Religious discussion. I have no intention of fighting your deletion as you have valid ground but will be interested in the dicussion. - Tεx τ urε 15:37, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

link directories

Please join in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:External_links#More_restrictive_policy_on_external_linking

Horizons

We are currently working on our own wikipeadia dedicated to Horizons: Empires of Istaria where we will enforce more strict rules to keep vandals out (IP banning, no anonymous edits), any chance of linking to that page once we've set it up? --Marco 18:03, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't see why not. It would be a reasonable addition to the existing article. I envy your control of anon edits... :) - Tεx τ urε 18:06, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nice, full story at 12'o clock news. --Marco 18:31, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Horizons Wikipeadia will be located at http://www.dragonspires.org/wiki/pmwiki.php --Marco 18:56, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

colours in sigs

As I've mentioned to a couple of other people, setting font colours in your reply is bad from a usability perspective - you're using red, which is the normal setting for "there's no page there" - and since there is, people will get confused - breaks the principle of least surprise. It would be better if you didn't do this, and found a different way to indicate where your talk page link is. Martin 18:35, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I see you are going to watch The Thirteenth Floor...

My uncle was the costume designer for The Thirteenth Floor but I have never watched it. Let me know what you think of it once you watch it. I'd like to know if it is worth sitting through. I loved the matrix and movies of that genre are really interesting.

I actually own it. It's better than The Matrix. It is more of a thinking movie than a glitzy special effects movie. Did your uncle work on the past, present, or future clothing designs? - Tεx τ urε 02:30, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

He actually is/was the costume designer. So I am pretty sure he did all of them...but wait, now I need to open a new tab in firefox and go see what [[1]] says. Yeah, he did all the costumes. From what he has told me, he does the designs, and then there are other people that put them together. But he supervises, gets the materials, checks everything etc.

BTW, are you an admin, or just an editor? I have been checking your user page and there is quite a bit there.

Admin. That movie was great. Made me want to drive to the edges and see if I'm in a box. - Tεx τ urε 17:57, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

User

Texture, how did all those User namespace prefixes get deleted, and how are you managing to put them back? Has it been a vandalbot? JFW | T@lk 19:49, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

They didn't get deleted. They are so old that they are from a time that userspace was not separate from article space. Redirects were temporarily implemented to connect from one to the other and in order to remove these without broken links the "user:" has to be inserted for talk pages where the signature was prior to userspace creation. (As far as I understand it. I wasn't around back then.) - Tεx τ urε 20:50, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, there goes my illusion that I knew something about WikiHistory :-). Did you know that Wikipedia comes up second in Google when you search for TANSTAAFL? Is your signature a veiled Googlebomb? JFW | T@lk 20:55, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What a neat idea! No, I was playing around with my signature and decided to see how many people pay attention. My first was "Ask me about my turtles" and someone spotted that. You are number two. Now I have to think of a new hidden phrase... - Tεx τ urε 20:58, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

User

Hey, I rolled back your change to User talk:Mbecker/Archive 1. The link as it was has historical signifigance. It's an archive of my talk page, and as such, if you change the link, it not longer has any meaning. Please be a little more careful when redirecting links in the future. Thanks! — マイケル ₪ 21:53, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)

The redirects from article space to user space are being deleted and the "User:" is being added so that the existing links don't break. If you roll back my changes the links will break when the redirects are removed. - Tεx τ urε 21:57, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm aware of that. Broken links never hurt anyone. The discussion refers specifically to the non-user page. At the time, I was trying to get rid of them...So, I'd rather it stay the way it was. It doesn't matter if the link is broken. — マイケル ₪ 14:42, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that. I'll try to avoid that. Thanks for the notice. - Tεx τ urε 17:02, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Removing DMOZ links

You're removing links to dmoz categories with the comment 'Wikipedia is not a link repository'. True, but:

external links are allowed (and in fact encouraged, for further reading / references)
dmoz IS a link repository, but does it then follow that by linking to it we're being a link repository? I think that linking TO one for further reference is different.
I have a recollection that whether to link to dmoz categories was argued before, and the consensus was to keep the links? I could be wrong.

Is this an issue you have with dmoz in particular, or do you disapprove of such linking in general? Is there consensus? Has this been discussed? —Morven 18:40, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

I have also removed yahoo, looksmart, and google directory links where they have no relation to the article. I have added an entry to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. Where DMOZ was appropriate to the article I did not remove it. In many cases it was a failed link. In other cases it only duplicated links in the article. I found no useful content in any of the links deleted. - Tεx τ urε 18:43, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There is also a draft proposed policy change to specifically allow directory links at Wikipedia:External links/temp - Tεx τ urε 18:46, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

As I commented on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress I don't think it's really vandalism. Many of the ones I've noticed were added by users who've made other edits (User:Liftarn made many of the automotive ones, for example). I think simply that many dmoz contributors also edit here and think the dmoz categories useful. —Morven 21:14, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

Check my response on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. I agree it isn't vandalism per se. Only appropriate place I could think of to list it for discussion or review. - Tεx τ urε 21:16, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Redirects from the pre-MediaWiki days

Hi Texture - you posted comments on my page about cleaning up the user pages from the pre-MediaWiki days. I'd ask you to slow down a bit - many of those links were left because there are a number of links outside of Wikipedia that link back to those pages. If people surf on in and there aren't any redirects in existence, they will be taken to a "Do you want to create this page?" dialog. This was the reason why they were not destroyed in the first place. Cheers Manning 05:01, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

Any links to articles are untouched. - Tεx τ urε 05:05, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)